Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Dispozisyon Tartışması: Atölye 1’in Dispozisyonel Tasarım Yaklaşımı

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 3, 553 - 569, 31.12.2024
https://doi.org/10.26835/my.1529631

Öz

Bu makalenin amacı, Gazi Üniversitesi Mimarlık Bölümü’nde eğitim faaliyetlerini sürdüren Atölye 1’in dispozisyonel yaklaşımı üzerinden dispozisyon kavramını tartışmaktır. Tartışma kapsamında geçtiğimiz yıl yaşanan ve ülkenin güney doğusunda bulunan kentlerin örüntüsünün bozulmasına, tahribata uğramasına ve yıkılmasına yol açan depremlerin bu kentlerden biri olan Hatay’da yarattığı dispozisyonel etki kavramsal ve bağlamsal bir çerçevede ele alınmaktadır. Ayrıca Atölye 1 öğrencilerinin Hatay’ın bozulmuş olan kent dokusuna odaklandığı; bu kentin depremler sonrası rehabilitasyon sürecine hizmet edecek olan yeni bir mekan tasarladığı ortaya koyulmaktadır. Dispoze olmuş, yani bozulmuş olan kent dokusu öğrencilerin bozulmayı tahribat ve yıkım gibi kavramlarla birlikte ele almasını sağlamıştır. Bu kavramlar yalnızca kentteki mekansal ya da yapısal yıkımı değil aynı zamanda depremler sonrasında yaşanan sosyal yıkımı da ifade edecek şekilde kullanılmıştır; çünkü depremzedelerin günlük yaşam rutinleri ve pratikleri bozuma uğramıştır. Atölye 1, kentteki bozulma ve yeniden yapılanma süreçlerini tartışırken bu tartışmayı depreme dayanıklı yapı tasarımı prensiplerine indirgemeyerek diğer eğitim ve tasarım ortamlarından farklı bir yaklaşım ortaya koymaya çalışmıştır. Atölyede, Hatay kentinde gerçekleşen bozulmalar tüm yönleriyle tartışılmış; yapısal olan (mekansal, çevresel vb.) ve yapısal olmayan (sosyal, işlevsel vb.) bozulmalar, kenti iyileştirmek ve dirençli hale getirmek üzere tasarlanan yeni bir kentsel mekanın dispozisyonel örüntüleri olarak ele alınmıştır.

Kaynakça

  • Armstrong, D. M., Martin, C. B., Place, U. T. (1996). Dispositions: A Debate. London: Routledge.
  • Ashwell, L. (2010). Superficial Dispositionalism. Australian Journal of Philosophy, 88 (1), 635–653.
  • Bird, A. (1998). Dispositions and Antidotes. The Philosophical Quarterly, 48 (1), 227–234.
  • Choi, S., Fara, M. (2021). Dispositions. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (p. 1-12). Stanford: The Stanford University Press.
  • Cleary, J. (2016). Agenda Education. Irish Arts Review (2002-), 33 (1), 56-60.
  • Easterling, K. (2010). Disposition, Cognitive Architecture: From Biopolitics to Noopolitics. In K. M. Hays, A. Moravánszky, M. Müller, F. R. Werner, G. Zimmermann (Ed.), Architecture & Mind in the Age of Communication and Information (p. 251-265). Rotterdam: Delft School of Design Series on Architecture and Urbanism.
  • Güleç, G. (2021). Discussing the Shift of the Urban Discourses from Metropolis to Metapolis in the Twenty First Century. Journal of Science Part B: Art, Humanities, Design and Planning, 9 (2), 119-128.
  • Maturana, B. C. (2014). Where is the ‘Problem’ in Design Studio: Purpose and Significance of the Design Task. International Journal of Architectural Research, 8 (3), 32-44. Mumford, S. (1994). Dispositions. Cogito, 8 (2), 141-146.
  • Ng, V. (2013). Values of Learning Through ‘Place-Making’ in the Design Studio. International Journal of Architectural Research, 7 (1), 86-98.
  • Ryle, G. (2009). The Concept of Mind. New York: Routledge.
  • Salingaros, N. A., Masden, K. G. (2010). Teaching Design at the Limits of Architecture. International Journal of Architectural Research, 4 (2), 19-31.
  • Soriano, F., Porras, F., Morales, J., Gausa, M., Guallart, V., Müller, W. (2003). The Metapolis Dictionary of Advanced Architecture: City, Technology and Society in the Information Age. Barcelona: Actar Publishing.
  • Sweeting, B. (2020). Place as a Reflexive Conversation with the Situation. In M. Butcher, M. O’Shea (Ed.), Expanding Fields of Architectural Discourse and Practice (p. 33-50). New York: UCL Press.
  • Tokman, L. Y., & Yamacli, R. (2007). Reality-Based Design Studio İn Architectural Education. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 24 (3), 245-269.
  • Uludağ, Z., Güleç, G. (2018). Reinterpreting City as a Critical Ground in Atelier 1 Projects: Some Prospects and Projections on Ankara. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 37 (3), 413-425.
  • URL-1: https://www.rep.routledge.com/search?searchString=disposition&newSearch= Accessed: 6/8/2024
  • URL-2: https://tiplopedi.com/index.php/Dispozisyon Accessed: 6/8/2024
  • URL-3: https://www.timocom.com.tr/lexicon/nakliye-s.zlüğü/dispozisyon Accessed: 6/8/2024
  • URL-4: https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/dispositions/v-1/sections/the-ontology-of-dispositions#

Discussing Dispositions: The Dispositional Design Approach of Atelier 1

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 3, 553 - 569, 31.12.2024
https://doi.org/10.26835/my.1529631

Öz

This paper aims to discuss the concept of disposition within the dispositional approach of Atelier 1, which is a design studio in Gazi University Department of Architecture located in Ankara, the capital city of Turkiye. It is a conceptual and contextual discussion on the dispositional effects of the recent earthquakes in Hatay, one of the cities disposed, disrupted and destructed in the south eastern district of the country. The students of Atelier 1 focus on the disposed urban pattern of Hatay to design a new architectural project serving for the rehabilitation process of the city. The disposed urban pattern paves the way for the students to conceive disposition as the tendency of disruption and destruction. This tendency is not only related to the spatial destruction but also the social destruction of the daily life routines and practices after the earthquakes in the city. Atelier 1 develops an unconventional design approach distinguishing the atelier from the other design practices and educational environments, which conventionally focus on problem-solving methodologies, and structural technologies of earthquake-resistant buildings. However, Atelier 1 deals with the structural (spatial, technological, environmental, etc.) and non-structural (social, cultural, functional, etc.) dispositions in the city of Hatay, by considering them as the dispositional patterns, possibilities or potentialities, to design a new urban space that invites people of all ages.

Kaynakça

  • Armstrong, D. M., Martin, C. B., Place, U. T. (1996). Dispositions: A Debate. London: Routledge.
  • Ashwell, L. (2010). Superficial Dispositionalism. Australian Journal of Philosophy, 88 (1), 635–653.
  • Bird, A. (1998). Dispositions and Antidotes. The Philosophical Quarterly, 48 (1), 227–234.
  • Choi, S., Fara, M. (2021). Dispositions. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (p. 1-12). Stanford: The Stanford University Press.
  • Cleary, J. (2016). Agenda Education. Irish Arts Review (2002-), 33 (1), 56-60.
  • Easterling, K. (2010). Disposition, Cognitive Architecture: From Biopolitics to Noopolitics. In K. M. Hays, A. Moravánszky, M. Müller, F. R. Werner, G. Zimmermann (Ed.), Architecture & Mind in the Age of Communication and Information (p. 251-265). Rotterdam: Delft School of Design Series on Architecture and Urbanism.
  • Güleç, G. (2021). Discussing the Shift of the Urban Discourses from Metropolis to Metapolis in the Twenty First Century. Journal of Science Part B: Art, Humanities, Design and Planning, 9 (2), 119-128.
  • Maturana, B. C. (2014). Where is the ‘Problem’ in Design Studio: Purpose and Significance of the Design Task. International Journal of Architectural Research, 8 (3), 32-44. Mumford, S. (1994). Dispositions. Cogito, 8 (2), 141-146.
  • Ng, V. (2013). Values of Learning Through ‘Place-Making’ in the Design Studio. International Journal of Architectural Research, 7 (1), 86-98.
  • Ryle, G. (2009). The Concept of Mind. New York: Routledge.
  • Salingaros, N. A., Masden, K. G. (2010). Teaching Design at the Limits of Architecture. International Journal of Architectural Research, 4 (2), 19-31.
  • Soriano, F., Porras, F., Morales, J., Gausa, M., Guallart, V., Müller, W. (2003). The Metapolis Dictionary of Advanced Architecture: City, Technology and Society in the Information Age. Barcelona: Actar Publishing.
  • Sweeting, B. (2020). Place as a Reflexive Conversation with the Situation. In M. Butcher, M. O’Shea (Ed.), Expanding Fields of Architectural Discourse and Practice (p. 33-50). New York: UCL Press.
  • Tokman, L. Y., & Yamacli, R. (2007). Reality-Based Design Studio İn Architectural Education. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 24 (3), 245-269.
  • Uludağ, Z., Güleç, G. (2018). Reinterpreting City as a Critical Ground in Atelier 1 Projects: Some Prospects and Projections on Ankara. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 37 (3), 413-425.
  • URL-1: https://www.rep.routledge.com/search?searchString=disposition&newSearch= Accessed: 6/8/2024
  • URL-2: https://tiplopedi.com/index.php/Dispozisyon Accessed: 6/8/2024
  • URL-3: https://www.timocom.com.tr/lexicon/nakliye-s.zlüğü/dispozisyon Accessed: 6/8/2024
  • URL-4: https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/dispositions/v-1/sections/the-ontology-of-dispositions#
Toplam 19 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Mimari Tarih, Teori ve Eleştiri, Mimari Tasarım, Mimarlık (Diğer)
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Gülşah Güleç 0000-0002-8041-2018

Zeynep Uludağ 0000-0001-9242-7957

Yayımlanma Tarihi 31 Aralık 2024
Gönderilme Tarihi 7 Ağustos 2024
Kabul Tarihi 28 Kasım 2024
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2024 Cilt: 9 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA Güleç, G., & Uludağ, Z. (2024). Discussing Dispositions: The Dispositional Design Approach of Atelier 1. Mimarlık Ve Yaşam, 9(3), 553-569. https://doi.org/10.26835/my.1529631

16299  16302  16303  18949   21920   30985 30986

download  downloaddownload